What's new

Dear Fat People

I disagree. Obesity is the second leading cause of death in the US. So it is as cut and dry as cigs. And while obesity only shares SOME of the symptoms of smoking, it also has its own unique annoyances. Like squishing everyone around you in airplanes/trains/crowded places. And it is fully preventable.

https://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/

We can disagree on this.

I stand on the premise that most are unwilling to be told they are eating the wrong foods/not exercising enough as a comparison to cigarettes are bad for you.

Things will undoubtedly, over time, become better with diet, but it will most likely come from government intervention, just as it did for the tobacco industry, and less because of shame.
 
A cultural shaming campaign would have been meaningless without the crippling legislations that followed through the tobacco campaign.


Either way, what you're missing is that obesity is fundamentally a health problem-- and not an image problem. Therein lies the difference. From a quick visual perspective, it is impossible to discern between someone who might have a decent amount of surface fat (but otherwise be completely healthy) to someone who is definitely obese. So, public shaming of obesity would moreso be an attack on all people who didn't satisfy the visual, arbitrary imagination of what our society deems as 'a healthy weight'.

Not only that, but an emphasis on tackling the issue of obesity through government & legislative change also has the propensity to tackle other chronic health issues that people suffer from even though they might not be obese! Plenty of non-obese individuals suffer from cancer, heart disease, and diabetes. How will shaming address these sicknesses?


I'm not saying this is a complete solution. I understand obesity's correlation with poverty (in developed countries), education, and historical circumstance (ex Tonga). But in some cases, like that of Kelly Clarkson, the situation can improve with increased social pressure.
My point may be narrow.. but it's basically this.
 
I disagree. Obesity is the second leading cause of death in the US. So it is as cut and dry as cigs. And while obesity only shares SOME of the symptoms of smoking, it also has its own unique annoyances. Like squishing everyone around you in airplanes/trains/crowded places. And it is fully preventable.

https://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/


Fully preventable? Not to millions of American families who are simply unable to live healthy lives, because their government is letting them down.
 
We can disagree on this.

I stand on the premise that most are unwilling to be told they are eating the wrong foods/not exercising enough as a comparison to cigarettes are bad for you.

Things will undoubtedly, over time, become better with diet, but it will most likely come from government intervention, just as it did for the tobacco industry, and less because of shame.

Did Peeks just speak favourably with regards to government intervention? Pinch me, somebody.
 
A cultural shaming campaign would have been meaningless without the crippling legislations that followed through the tobacco campaign.


Either way, what you're missing is that obesity is fundamentally a health problem-- and not an image problem. Therein lies the difference. From a quick visual perspective, it is impossible to discern between someone who might have a decent amount of surface fat (but otherwise be completely healthy) to someone who is definitely obese. So, public shaming of obesity would moreso be an attack on all people who didn't satisfy the visual, arbitrary imagination of what our society deems as 'a healthy weight'.

Not only that, but an emphasis on tackling the issue of obesity through government & legislative change also has the propensity to tackle other chronic health issues that people suffer from even though they might not be obese! Plenty of non-obese individuals suffer from cancer, heart disease, and diabetes. How will shaming address these sicknesses?

Pretty convincing. Maybe this approach wouldn't really work for the problem of obesity.
 
Fully preventable? Not to millions of American families who are simply unable to live healthy lives, because their government is letting them down.

Wait, what? **** you Candadanain ******

Harrison+Slur.JPG
 
Did Peeks just speak favourably with regards to government intervention? Pinch me, somebody.

Some is good, most is bad.. some of it is completely necessary.. and even that I disagree with. fatties gon do wut fatties gon do.
 
Some is good, most is bad.. some of it is completely necessary.. and even that I disagree with. fatties gon do wut fatties gon do.

Socialism will prevail! Come to the dark side Peeksbro. Oh, and let me raise the amount of taxes you need to pay while you come here ;)
 
Socialism will prevail! Come to the dark side Peeksbro. Oh, and let me raise the amount of taxes you need to pay while you come here ;)

Not a chance.

I prefer an organic growth over contrived ideals. Even if I were to start over, right now, penniless.
 
I am surprised Clarkson is obese when celebrities have an easy access to clen, T3, and DNP.

Anyway here is an interesting video. I think it might have been posted here already but wasn't sure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUmp67YDlHY
 
Fully preventable? Not to millions of American families who are simply unable to live healthy lives, because their government is letting them down.

Ugh, this statement makes me cringe. 9/10ths of those families CAN live healthy lives, but choose not to.

I am surprised Clarkson is obese when celebrities have an easy access to clen, T3, and DNP.

Anyway here is an interesting video. I think it might have been posted here already but wasn't sure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUmp67YDlHY


I've seen that before and it hits home like a mother ****er. As a dad with daughters and fat genes on both sides of the family, I worry about this constantly.
 
I don't know if many of you guys know this but our intestines have more neurons than rats have in their brain. We literally have a second brain in our gut. What is interesting is that this interaction of our gut with our microbiota is a key factor in obesity. After giving obese mice the microbiota of normal rats the obese mice have become skinny repeatedly in studies performed.

https://www.nature.com/ajgsup/journal/v1/n1/full/ajgsup20125a.html

Here is a pretty interesting review about it.

Also, our gut determines much of our testosterone levels. If you give women microbiota of men, women will produce much more testosterone. Some people think microbiota determines autism and other things. Pretty interesting.
 
Ugh, this statement makes me cringe. 9/10ths of those families CAN live healthy lives, but choose not to.

This statement really, really makes me cringe. So what is it then, Trout? Are the 90% lazy?

How come the lazy people of Europe aren't as consistently fat as their European counterparts?



I've seen that before and it hits home like a mother ****er. As a dad with daughters and fat genes on both sides of the family, I worry about this constantly.

There are 'fat genes' that biologically pre-determine someones obesity? News to me. Does America have more 'fat genes' than everyone else? Is that why they're all fat?
 
This statement really, really makes me cringe. So what is it then, Trout? Are the 90% lazy?

You're asking me to answer an unanswerable question. My opinion, however, is that 90% of them are able, but for whatever reason, are not willing.

How come the lazy people of Europe aren't as consistently fat as their European counterparts?

What?

There are 'fat genes' that biologically pre-determine someones obesity? News to me. Does America have more 'fat genes' than everyone else? Is that why they're all fat?

I'm not studying it in school like you are, but ya, I have always known about fat genes. My family is haunted with them. There is ONE non-morbidly obese girl on my dads side of the family, and I'm pretty sure it's only because she does meth on the regular. However, I thought I'd Google the whole fat gene thing... You may want to consider going to another university that isn't Canadian, that's all I'm saying.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/10/fat-genes-obesity-ucla-study-diet-exercise_n_2450108.html

https://healthland.time.com/2013/07/19/news-genes-idd-in-obesity-how-much-of-weight-is-genetic/

Just off the first page.
 
You're asking me to answer an unanswerable question. My opinion, however, is that 90% of them are able, but for whatever reason, are not willing.


It's not unanswerable-- it's only unanswerable while maintaining to your approach to the issue. Your view of them simply 'not being willing' simply lacks perspective.


If we are to assume that there's an equal distribution of 'lazy' people across the world, and laziness is the driving factor behind obesity, then every industrialized country in the world should have equal obesity rates. This is not the case.



I'm not studying it in school like you are, but ya, I have always known about fat genes. My family is haunted with them. There is ONE non-morbidly obese girl on my dads side of the family, and I'm pretty sure it's only because she does meth on the regular. However, I thought I'd Google the whole fat gene thing... You may want to consider going to another university that isn't Canadian, that's all I'm saying.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/10/fat-genes-obesity-ucla-study-diet-exercise_n_2450108.html

https://healthland.time.com/2013/07/19/news-genes-idd-in-obesity-how-much-of-weight-is-genetic/

Just off the first page.

1) Note my use of the word 'predetermine'. Predetermine does not mean predispose.

2) Awww!! The links you posted just did my job for me! From the TIMES article:

“Thus far mutations in about eight genes are known to cause obesity in humans. But these mutations account for under five percent of the obesity in our society, and certainly are not, by themselves, responsible for the current obesity epidemic, since the mutation rate in these genes could not have changed dramatically during the past twenty years,” says Dr. Joseph Majzoub, the chief of the division of endocrinology at Boston Children’s Hospital and an author on the Science paper.
 
I don't know if many of you guys know this but our intestines have more neurons than rats have in their brain. We literally have a second brain in our gut. What is interesting is that this interaction of our gut with our microbiota is a key factor in obesity. After giving obese mice the microbiota of normal rats the obese mice have become skinny repeatedly in studies performed.

https://www.nature.com/ajgsup/journal/v1/n1/full/ajgsup20125a.html

Here is a pretty interesting review about it.

Also, our gut determines much of our testosterone levels. If you give women microbiota of men, women will produce much more testosterone. Some people think microbiota determines autism and other things. Pretty interesting.

America really fell behind on Microbiome research in the 2000s, which allowed a lot of Canadian Universities to be trailblazers in this field.

A Calgarian doctor is already trying to create a 'poop pill' that harnesses a lot of the ideas mentioned in your post to treat C. difficile infections.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calg...eat-c-difficile-calgary-doctor-says-1.1895079
 
It's not unanswerable-- it's only unanswerable while maintaining to your approach to the issue. Your view of them simply 'not being willing' simply lacks perspective.

I'm ok with that. Just because you don't agree with my perspective doesn't mean that mine is wrong. (Which it's not, of course.)

If we are to assume that there's an equal distribution of 'lazy' people across the world, and laziness is the driving factor behind obesity, then every industrialized country in the world should have equal obesity rates. This is not the case.

I don't have an answer for this, sorry.

1) Note my use of the word 'predetermine'. Predetermine does not mean predispose.

Oooooh kay.

2) Awww!! The links you posted just did my job for me! From the TIMES article:

How do you figure? All it did was prove your statement, not withstanding your cute word game, was rubbish.
 
You genetically dispositioned to produce a little more of the hormone cortisol than average? Cortisol promotes more energy to be used as fat and less as muscle. Similar with the protein myostatin. If you are genetically dispositioned to eat in a slight caloric surplus or to create a slightly less muscle mass with your calories over years and years two people can be very different with similar lifestyles and diet and be very different.

However, like intelligence, I think the genetic influence for obesity is exaggerated.
 
You genetically dispositioned to produce a little more of the hormone cortisol than average? Cortisol promotes more energy to be used as fat and less as muscle. Similar with the protein myostatin. If you are genetically dispositioned to eat in a slight caloric surplus or to create a slightly less muscle mass with your calories over years and years two people can be very different with similar lifestyles and diet and be very different.

However, like intelligence, I think the genetic influence for obesity is exaggerated.

You named two genes with loose dispositions-- there's tens more than we know of, and probably even more that we don't. Yet all of them are only found in tiny segments of America's obese population.

As a Genetics student, it's very obvious to me how much people exaggerated genetic links to common diseases-- especially chronic diseases.

Again-- if Genetics played a big role, that would mean that obesity rates would be constant over the past several centuries-- but, our genes haven't changed at all. Its our lifestyle that has changed. Sure, some people might gain weight a little easier than others, but everyone has the capacity to live a healthy life, obesity-free, regardless of his genetic composition (save for very, very, very rare circumstances).

Discussing genetics when talking about addressing obesity is simply the wrong way to approach the issue.
 
Back
Top